하이브리드 조직의 모순 대응 전략 변화: 소셜벤처 노을과 에누마 사례를 중심으로

The Hybrid Organization's Response to Conflicting Institutional Demands: A Case Study about Social Ventures

  • Jin, Wooseok (Science and Technology Policy Institute(STEPI)) ;
  • Seong, Jieun (Science and Technology Policy Institute(STEPI))
  • 투고 : 2022.08.05
  • 심사 : 2022.10.25
  • 발행 : 2022.10.31

초록

최근의 기업은 주주의 이윤 극대화를 넘어서 사회적 목표의 달성을 요구받으며, 이에 따라 기업의 경제적 목표와 사회적 목표를 동시에 추구하는 것이 중요하게 여겨지고 있다. 이러한 시대적 배경에서 하이브리드 조직에 대한 연구는 이론적·실무적으로 중요성이 증가하고 있다. 특히 하이브리드 조직은 본질적으로 경제적 목적과 사회적 목적을 동시에 추구하는 이중성을 가지고 있기에, 하이브리드 조직을 둘러싼 여러 이해관계자들의 제도적 요구 또한 모순적이다. 이처럼 모순된 제도적 요구에 하이브리드 조직이 대응하는 방식에 대해 여러 선행연구에서 고찰했으나, 대부분 연구가 특정 시점의 대응에 한정되어 있었다. 따라서 하이브리드 조직이 사업을 확장하고 진화하는 과정에 따라 모순된 제도적 요구에 대한 대응전략이 변화하는 모습을 파악하기에는 한계가 있었다. 본 연구는 하이브리드 조직이 모순된 제도적 요구에 대해 선택적 동조화를 취할 것으로 보았으며, 모순된 제도적 요구에 대한 대응이 조직의 성장과정에 따라 변화할 것으로 보았다. 모순된 제도적 요구에 대한 대응방식의 변화를 파악하기 위해 본 연구는 혁신성·기술성에서 좋은 성과를 내면서 고도화된 수준의 비즈니스모델을 운영하고 있는 소셜벤처인 노을과 에누마를 선정해 사례 연구를 수행하였다. 분석 결과 소셜벤처는 모순된 제도적 요구에 대해 선택적 동조화 방식을 취하며, 소셜벤처의 사업이 고도화됨에 따라 선택적 동조화 과정이 변화하는 모습을 보인다. 구체적으로 사업 초기에는 단일 비즈니스모델로 경제적 요구와 사회적 요구를 동시에 대응하는 모습을 보인다. 이후 사업이 고도화되면 두 개 이상의 비즈니스모델을 운영하여서 일부는 경제적 요구에 대응을 하고, 일부는 사회적 요구에 대응하게 된다. 이는 사업 초기 소셜벤처가 제도적 환경에 대해 정당성을 얻고 생존하기 위해 단일 비즈니스모델로 경제적 요구와 사회적 요구를 동시에 대응하되, 사업 성장기에 접어들면 지속가능한 성장을 추구하고 대규모 미션에 도전하기 위하여 경제적 가치를 추구하는 비즈니스모델과 사회적 가치를 추구하는 비즈니스모델을 분리하여 대응하는 것으로 해석된다. 이를 통해 본 연구는 하이브리드 조직이 성장함에 따라서 모순된 제도적 요구에 대응하는 방식이 달라지는 변화 양상을 밝혀내어 하이브리드 조직에 대한 심층적인 이해에 기여하고자 했다.

Nowadays companies are required to achieve social goals beyond maximizing shareholder profits. Accordingly, it is important to pursue both the economic and social goals of a company at the same time. Thus the importance of hybrid organizations is increasing theoretically and practically. In particular, since hybrid organizations essentially have the complexity of pursuing both economic and social purposes, the institutional demands of various stakeholders surrounding hybrid organizations are also conflicting. Several previous studies have considered how hybrid organizations respond to these conflicting institutional demands, but most studies are limited to studying at a specific point in time. As a result, there was a limit to analyzing the dynamics in response to conflicting institutional demands as the hybrid organization expanded its business. This study predicted that the hybrid organization would take selective coupling with conflicting institutional demands and that the process of responding to institutional demands would change according to the organization's growth. In this study, we had a case study about Noul and Enuma, social ventures that operate relatively advanced business models with outstanding results in innovation and technology. As a result, social ventures show a selective coupling for conflicting institutional demands, and the selective coupling process changes as their business model are advanced. Specifically, in the early stages of the business, it appears to respond to economic and social demands at the same time with a single business model. When the business is advanced, two or more business models are operated, some of which respond to economic needs and some of which respond to social needs. In the early stages of business, social ventures respond to economic and social demands with a single business model to gain legitimacy and survive in the institutional demands. But when they enter the business growth period, they try to separate business models which respond to economic and social values because they pursue sustainable growth and challenge large-scale missions. Overall, this study attempted to contribute to an in-depth understanding of hybrid organizations by identifying that the method of responding to conflicting institutional demands varies depending on the growth process of social ventures.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Baxter, P., & Jack, S.(2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.
  2. Battilana, J., & Dorado, S.(2010). Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.57318391
  3. Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C.(2012). In Search of the Hybrid Ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10, 50-55.
  4. Battilana, J., & Lee, M.(2014). Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing-Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397-441. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.893615
  5. Battilana, J., Besharov, M., & Mitzinneck, B.(2017). On Hybrids and Hybrid Organizing: A Review and Roadmap for Future Research. The SAGE handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, London: Sage, 133-169.
  6. Battilana, J., Obloj, T., Pache, A. C., & Sengul, M..(2022). Beyond Shareholder value Maximization: Accounting for Financial/Social Trade-offs in Dual-purpose Companies. Academy of Management Review, 47(2), 237-258. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0386
  7. Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K.(2014). Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining their Varied Nature and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364-381. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431
  8. Besharov, M., & Mitzinneck, B.(2020). Organizational Hybridity: Perspectives, Processes, Promises. Washington: Emerald Group Publishing, 12-15.
  9. Bloom, P. N., & Chatterji, A. K.(2009). Scaling Social Entrepreneurial Impact. California Management Review, 51(3), 114-133. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166496
  10. Coleman, S., & Kariv, D.(2015). Creating the Social Venture. Boston: Routledge.
  11. Cooper, B., & Vlaskovits, P.(2010). The entrepreneur's guide to customer development: a" cheat sheet" to The Four Steps to the Epiphany, CA: Newport Beach. 90-110.
  12. Creswell, J. W.(2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study. DBER Speaker Series, NB: University of Nebraska.
  13. Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F.(2014). Social Enterprises as Hybrid Organizations: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417-436. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12028
  14. Dacin, M. T., Dacin, P. A., & Tracey, P.(2011). Social Entrepreneurship: A Critique and Future Directions. Organization Science, 22(5), 1203-1213. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0620
  15. Daft, R. L.(2015). Organization Theory and Design(10th ed). Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning
  16. Daft, R. L.(2020). Organization Theory & Design(13rd ed). Boston: Cengage learning.
  17. De Carolis, D. M., & Saparito, P.(2006). Social Capital, Cognition, and Entrepreneurial Opportunities: A Theoretical Framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00109.x
  18. Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M..(2011), Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317-371. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2011.590299
  19. Gustafsson, J.(2017). Single Case Studies vs. Multiple Case Studies: A Comparative Study. Academy of Business, Engineering and Science. Halmstad, Sweden: Halmstad University.
  20. Han, J. S., & Choi, J. Y.(2021). The Effects of the Dual Values(Economic value vs. Social value) of Social Venture and the Venture Capitalist's Construal Level on the Investment Intention. The Korea Enterpreneurship Society, 16(4), 85-111.
  21. Jang, J. W.(2022). The Mission and Vision of Social Venture "Noul". DBR Case Study, 350(1). 1-8, Retrieved from https://dbr.donga.com/article/view/1206/article_no/10538. 10538
  22. Jay, J.(2013). Navigating Paradox as a Mechanism of Change and Innovation in Hybrid Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137-159. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0772
  23. Joo, S. Y.(2016.12.27.). So that Everyone can Learn for Themselves...'ENUMA", ChosunMedia. Retrieved from https://futurechosun.com/archives/18689.
  24. Kang, E. S., & Lee, D. G.(2005). A Methodological Discourse on Policy Case Studies. Korea Journal of Public Administration, 43.
  25. Kickul, J., Griffiths, M., Bacq, S., & Garud, N.(2018). Catalyzing Social Innovation: is Entrepreneurial Bricolage Always Good?. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30(3-4), 407-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2017.1413771
  26. Kim, S. H.(2011). Propositions for Institutional Diffusion of Corporate Social Responsibility in KOREA: Lessons from Advanced Countries. International Business Review, 15(3), 131-152. https://doi.org/10.21739/IBR.2011.09.15.3.131
  27. Kim, S. J., Kim, N. Y., & Lee, S. J.(2021). The Theory of the Growth of the Social Venture: A Dynamic Hybridity View. Journal of Strategic Management, 25(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.17786/JSM.2022.25.1.001
  28. Kim, J. S., Lee, C. Y., Kim, J. H., Seo, K. J., & Park, J. H.(2016). Creating Social Ventures. Seoul; Chungram.
  29. Kim, J. Y., Sung, C. S., Cho, H. J., & Moon, K. H.(2020). A Study on the Decision Making Process of Social Venture: he case of Goyohan Taxi. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 15(4), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.15.4.202008.83
  30. Kraatz, M. S., & Block, E. S.(2008). Organizational Implications of Institutional Pluralism, The Sage handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. London: Sage, 243-275.
  31. Kwong, C., Tasavori, M., & Wun-mei Cheung, C.(2017). Bricolage, Collaboration and Mission Drift in Social Enterprises. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(7-8), 609-638. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2017.1328904
  32. Lall, S. A., & Park, J.(2022). How Social Ventures Grow: Understanding the Role of Philanthropic Grants in Scaling Social Entrepreneurship. Business & Society, 61(1), 3-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650320973434
  33. Lee, B. S.(2019). Learning Software for Illiterate Children: Enuma's 'KitKit School'. DBR Case Study, 279(2). 1-8, Retrieved from https://dbr.donga.com/article/view/1203/article_no/9249.
  34. Lee, H. K.(2016). Science and Technology Innovation (STI) and Education: Development of Tablets-based Children's Education App to Improve Educational Conditions in Tanzania. Journal of International Development Cooperation, 11(4), 53-70.
  35. Luke, B., & Verreynne, M. L.(2006). Exploring Strategic Entrepreneurship in the Public Sector. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management. 3(1), 4-26. https://doi.org/10.1108/11766090610659724
  36. Lumpkin, G. T., Moss, T. W., Gras, D. M., Kato, S., & Amezcua, A. S.(2013), Entrepreneurial Processes in Social Contexts: How are They Different, If at all?. Small Business Economics, 40(3), 761-783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9399-3
  37. McMullen, J. S., & Warnick, B. J.(2016). Should we Require Every New Venture to be a Hybrid Organization?. Journal of Management Studies, 53(4), 630-662. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12150
  38. Margiono, A., Zolin, R., & Chang, A.(2017). A Typology of Social Venture Business Model Configurations. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24(3), 626-650. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-09-2016-0316
  39. Marinov, K., Metz, A., Alexander, K., & Angeli, F.(2022). Learning in Hybrid Organizations: A Systematic Literature Review. in Angeli, F., Metz, A., & Raab, J.(2022), Organizing for Sustainable Development: Addressing the Grand Challenges (1st ed.). Boston: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429243165.
  40. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B.(1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
  41. Moss, T. W., Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Lumpkin, G. T.(2011). Dual Identities in Social Ventures: An Exploratory Study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 805-830. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00372.x
  42. Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G.(2010). The Open book of Social Innovation (Vol. 24), London: Nesta.
  43. Pache, A. C., & Santos, F.(2010). When Worlds Collide: The Internal Dynamics of Organizational Responses to Conflicting Institutional Demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 455-476.
  44. Pache, A. C., & Santos, F.(2013). Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972-1001. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0405
  45. Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. M..(2021). When Worlds Keep on Colliding: Exploring the Consequences of Organizational Responses to Conflicting Institutional Demands. Academy of Management Review, 46(4), 640-659. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2021.0197
  46. Park, J. H., & Jeon, H. J.(2019). The Tool to Design Sustainable Business Models: A Case Study for the Social Ventures. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 14(1), 187-198. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.14.1.201902.187
  47. Park, J. H., & Hwang, K. J.(2017). A Study on the Effects of Adoption and Application of Platform Strategy for Social Ventures in Early Stage of Start-up: A Case Study of JUMP. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 12(4), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.12.4.201708.133
  48. Park, M.. J., & Kim, T. Y.(2018). An Analysis of the Role of Social Ventures in Social Innovation. Social Enterprise Studies, 11(3), 3-30.
  49. Park, N. Y., & Lee, E. S.(2019). A Case Study on the Sustainability of Dohands Corporation. Social Enterprise Studies, 12(1), 55-90.
  50. Park, Y. J.(2020). How to Talk about the Value of a Market that Doesn't Exist-ENUMA. Asan Entrepreneurship Review, 6(5), 1-19.
  51. Rha, J. Y.(2019). Mobile Platform of a Social Venture for Providing Remote Psychological Help Service: A Atommerce Case. The Korea Service Management Society, 20(4), 125-144. https://doi.org/10.15706/jksms.2019.20.4.007
  52. Rha, J. Y.(2020). Social Commenting Service of Social Venture for Reducing Malicious Comments in Online Media: A CIZION Case, The Korea Service Management Society, 21(4), 165-190. https://doi.org/10.15706/jksms.2020.21.4.007
  53. Ruef, M., & Patterson, K.(2009). Credit and Classification: The Impact of Industry Boundaries in Nineteenth-century America. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(3), 486-520. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.3.486
  54. Thornton, P. H.(2002). The Rise of the Corporation in a Craft Industry: Conflict and Conformity in Institutional Logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 81-101. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069286
  55. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W.(2008). "Institutional logics". In The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism, London: Sage, 99-129.
  56. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M.(2012). The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process. London: Oxford.
  57. Thompson, J., & Doherty, B.(2006). The Diverse world of Social Enterprise: A Collection of Social Enterprise Stories. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 361-375. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290610660643
  58. Tilcsik, A.(2010). From Ritual to Reality: Demography, Ideology, and Decoupling in a Post-communist Government Agency. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1474-1498. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.57318905
  59. Saebi, T., Foss, N. J., & Linder, S.(2019). Social Entrepreneurship Research: Past Achievements and Future Promises. Journal of Management, 45(1), 70-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318793196
  60. Sarasvathy, S. D.(2001). Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243-263. https://doi.org/10.2307/259121
  61. Scott, W.(2013). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities. London: Sage. 1-10.
  62. Siebold, N., Gunzel-Jensen, F., & Muller, S.(2019). Balancing Dual Missions for Social Venture Growth: A Comparative Case Study. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 31(9-10), 710-734. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2018.1554710
  63. Smith, W. K., & Besharov, M. L.(2019). Bowing Before Dual Gods: How Structured Flexibility Sustains Organizational Hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217750826
  64. Song, W. C., & Seong, J. E.(2021). A Exploratory Study on the Transition-Oriented Firm: A Conceptual Framework and a Case Study. Journal of Technology Innovation, 29(4), 59-93. https://doi.org/10.14386/SIME.2021.29.4.59
  65. Stam, W., Arzlanian, S., & Elfring, T.(2014). Social Capital of Entrepreneurs and Small Firm Performance: A Meta-analysis of Temporal and Contextual Contingencies. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 152-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.01.002
  66. Vedula, S., York, J. G., Conger, M., & Embry, E.(2022). Green to Gone? Regional Institutional Logics and Firm Survival in Moral Markets. Organization Science. published in online.
  67. WHO(2021), World Malaria Report 2021, Retrieved from https://www.who.int/teams/global-malaria-programme/reports/world-malaria-report-2021.
  68. Wry, T., Lounsbury, M., & Jennings, P. D.(2014). Hybrid Vigor: Securing Venture Capital by Spanning Categories in Nanotechnology. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1309-1333.
  69. Wry, T., & York, J. G.(2017). An Identity-based Approach to Social Enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 437-460. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0506
  70. Yin, R. K.(2003). Designing Case studies. In Case study Research: Design and methods, CA: Thousand Oaks, 19-56.